Re: 747 with engines on the wings?

Date:         19 Feb 98 01:33:55 
From:         megazone@megazone.org (MegaZone)
Organization: WPI Discordian Society, Undocumented Cabal of the Accursed Saint Shiranto Joe
References:   1
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

RLION@worldonline.nl (Lion's Pers Agentschap) shaped the electrons to say:
> What is the reason that airliners have engines under the wing instead
>of on it?
>
> Possibly it will take a little bit more aluminium to construct
>airliners this way, but with overwing engines the wing can deflect a
>big portion of the noise for people living around airports. (This can
>be reached even without improving the engines themselves!)

1. Maintenance - it is a lot harder and a lot more expensive to get at
high mounted engines.
2. Cabin noise - the VFW-614 failed in part because it was low wing with
overwing engines.  The enginer noise was loud and constant in the cabin.
You only have a few minutes around an airport, but hours in the cabin.
3. Flutter.  Mouting the engines on pylons under the wing makes them
natural balance weights.
4. Danger.  If an enginer throws a compressor or turbine while under the
wing the wing shields the cabin.  A low wing with over wing engines
endangers the cabin.  And a highwing with overwing engines is a maintanence
nightmare - let alone highwing airliners are notoriously unpopular.
Underwing engines can also be designed to safely shear away in times
of trouble and they fall clear of the airframe.

I could come up with more but I'm getting tired.

I don't think we'll see over-wing engines on commercial craft in the
forseeable future.

-MZ
--
<URL:mailto:megazone@livingston.com> Gweep, author, webmaster, human being, me
<URL:mailto:megazone@megazone.org> H:510-527-0944  W:800-458-9966 510-426-0770
<URL:mailto:megazone@gweep.net> <URL:http://www.megazone.org/> Hail Discordia!